J
JillianRose
Guest
Thank you very much for your Knowledge sir. God Bless. I hope someday I will catch up with you and I will be able to actual have such high level of educated debates that you can!!
In Christ,
Jillian
- Status
In Christ,
Jillian
You are very kind, Jillian, though you may be overestimating me.Thank you very much for your Knowledge sir. God Bless. I hope someday I will catch up with you and I will be able to actual have such high level of educated debates that you can!!
In Christ,
Jillian
His peace,
Jon
C
Chafer_DTS
Guest
The principles of Sola Scripture. Scripture is supreme over councils of the church, bishops, the Pope, tradition.
Scripture is infallible while all those other lesser authorities are fallible.Scripture is infallible due to the fact that it is God’s Word. When Scripture speaks it is God speaking. Scripture says God cannnot lie and since Scripture is God’s Word it therefore cannot lie. Thus infallibility of Scripture. Scripture has the authority of God Himself on this basis. God is Supreme.
Do you believe that Scripture can teach error ?What Scripture says. When Arius says Jesus is not God and John 1:1-14 teaches Jesus is God second person of the Trinity I am to believe Scripture and reject the heresy of Arianism. This is what the Council of Nicea did.
Scripture is communication between God and man. Are you trying to say God is unable to talk to man in a manner that can be understood in His essential message to His people ? When we read or talk to others this too is subject to interpretation. Your question assume what is termed sola ecclesiology or the church is supreme. You yourself must interprete what your own church says.
Looks like you practice things of what you dont want others doing with regard to Scripture. How do you know that the Roman Catholic Church has been teaching Scripture and Tradition properly through out church history ? Is this not subject to private judgement and interpretation of information ?I submit myself to what Scripture says. For example, for a period of about 80 years Arianism was a universal belief in the church prior to the council of Nice and supported by such men as Liberious Bishop of Rome and Arian councils. Since many passages such as John 1:1-14 and others teaches the deity of Jesus I stand with Scripture if I was living in that day and age when most Bishops in the church were teaching Arianism contrary to what the Word of God teaches. If what the chuch teaches lines up with the teaching of Scripture I will submit to it. I have no problem with that but with being aware that the church nor its bishops are infallible in teaching. If my Bishops teaches Jesus is the eternal Son of God incarnate I look at Scripture and say amen for that is what Scripture is teaching. I follow the basic principle of what the Apostle Paul wrote when he said " Test all things; hold fast to what is good. " in 1 Thes 5:21.
It has the full authority of God since Scripture is God’s Word.
There is no higher authority than God Himself in what he says. Scripture is inspired by God that is the basis of it’s Supreme authority. Last time I checked we dont have any inspired prophets of God today or apostles. We donot have any new individual books being written today to become part of the NT Canon. We know that councils of the church can error and even contradict one another at times such as the Arian councils verses Nicea. We know that Bishops in the church can error looking at many cases of it likewise same with Popes. We have Pope Honorious and others condemned for formal heresy by the 6th general council of the church. We have letters of Liberious which teaches Arianism thus guilty of formal heresy. We know tradition can error when some claimed apostolic tradition which said that Jesus died at the age of 56 by Ireaneus.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Chafer DTS:
Really? Chapter and verse where Scriptures teaches it is supreme over councils of the church,bishops,etc,etc? By the way, kindly show us where God Himself also teaches Scripture is supreme?
.
Really? Chapter and verse where Scriptures teaches it is supreme over councils of the church,bishops,etc,etc? By the way, kindly show us where God Himself also teaches Scripture is supreme?
Really? Wow! Jesus Church is fallible? Interesting. A fallible church determined the canon of infallible writings?
C
Chafer_DTS
Guest
Excuse me but when you claim Sola Scriptura teaches something those which I listed are sources which defines the beliefs of those who hold to it . In terms of defending it thats a different manner which can and has been done. If you are claiming Sola Scriptura teaches one thing and standard Protestant creeds says something different I take their word over that instead of what you claim. Confessions of faith defines the offical positions of the communions which each is part of. The issue here is on why do you get to define what Sola Scriptura is and not those who hold to it as defined in their doctrinal confessions of faith ? I am sure you would not like it when Protestants claim Roman Catholics believe this or that when offical teaching has something else. This is best in order to avoid misrepresentation of other peoples beliefs. When that is done it is bearing false wittness. Remember that is part of the commandments of God on what not to do.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Chafer DTS:
Chapter and verse where Scripture declares it is the **sole **infallible rule of faith and practice?
Who says they are secondary? Does scripture teach these facets are secondary to scripture?
Chapter and verse where Scriptures teaches this position? So the council of Jersualem in 49/50 AD was subject to scripture? Which scripture? Which canon? Which Bible? Which NT writings?
Chapter and verse Scriptures teaches are other things are fallible while Scripture is the only infallible source?
How ironic such a Biblical position has produced thousands of denominations due to the fact Scripture should have the straight-foward answer-right?
Chapter and verse where Scriptures declares such a position? Please show us where Jesus Himself held to such a position and taught it?
Geeeee…I wonder why?
P
pablope
Guest
The principles of Sola Scripture. Scripture is supreme over councils of the church, bishops, the Pope, tradition.
Okay…where does the Bible state such fact?
If you cannot cite such chapter and verse…then you are adhering to someone saying it so…declaring it so…so it is extra-Biblical. And if in fact you adhered to someone declaring it so…so how can you now assure us here that this declaration is without error?
P
pablope
Guest
[/QUOTE]T
It has the full authority of God since Scripture is God’s Word.
You did not really answer the question…let me re-ask…how can a book, the Bible, exercise its authority? How can it act and declare something us unbiblical?
Really? And do you think protestants can also err? Do you think Luther and Calvin and their friends also erred?
Not when teaching faith and morals. Pope Honorius is a misunderstanding…and has been misused by Protestants…but this is for another thread…if you wish to explore it further.
Was Ireneus speaking on faith and morals when he said that? Or was it opinion?
C
Chafer_DTS
Guest
Hmm. You have a problem there. Ecumentical councils took place after 300ad. Dont try and back date general councils of the church. The synod of Jerusalem in Acts 15 has Scripture as supreme for the basis of it’s decision that was declared by James who was leader of that council when he said it is my judgement. He based it on the Old Testament as a case in point. As far as Elders / Bishops being subject to Scripture we have 1 Timothy 5:17-18 in teaching the people of God. Paul declared that false teachers would exist in the church in Acts 20:28-31. Paul used Scripture in teaching the people of God in Acts 20:25-27. We find this in Scripture. Jesus who is God incarnate made that clear that Scripture when he taught Scripture is surepeme in Matthew 4:4.
Jesus said " it is written " which in context carries the full authority of God. Scripture is God’s written Word. I was under the impression you and others held that Scripture is the Word Of God. ???Yes the church is fallible. How else would you for example explain that " some there is some of the 7 churches in Revelation 2 and 3 ? How else will you example Arian councils before Nicea ? These Arian councils had many more bishops than Nicea yet they were heretical and are to be rejected. Do you deny the existence of heresy as taking place within the church ? Yes or no ?
A fallible church determined the canon of infallible writings?
Hey Pablope,
I can’t speak for Chafer, but for Lutherans this absolutely not the case. our pastors are bound to hold to the Lutheran Confessions as the right reflection of scripture. So, our pastor is not supreme.
Carry on, my friend.
Jon
C
Chafer_DTS
Guest
Paul did refer to Scripture as making the man of God complete or sufficient ( base on NT Greek word used there ) for his task of doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction for righteousness. That is what Paul wrote in 2 Tim. 3:16-18. It likewise teaches that Scripture is given by inspiration of God which places this is a special class from all other things that are oral or written. We have no claimed prophets of God or apostles today thus we presently have no so called inspired unwritten oral tradition. The facts are this : 1 ) Scripture is sufficient for the man of God for his task. 2 ) The nature and quality of Scripture makes it supreme. It is inspired by God and is in a class by itself.
If they are not inspired by God they are by necessity secondary since they are not equal to Scripture. Scripture claims inspiration of God for itself. That is enough for me.
I was under the impression that you and others held that Scripture is a partial rule of faith ? Why are you attacking Scripture if you view it as a partial rule of faith ? Yes Scripture teaches those other things are secondary. Remember the days of the apostles had the oral word of God and the written word of God and were binding on Christians. We no longer have the oral word of God since we presently have no prophets or apostles today. And we are no longer adding new individual books to the NT Canon.Acts 15:15 is where James appealed to Amos 9 for the basis of His judgement on the doctrinal issue that was dealt with. At that time they had the OT. Individual NT books get added to the rule of faith when they are written and collected. You see as each NT book is written the rule of faith gets expanded to include them as they are inspired Scripture. Much of your questions do not deal with something I said or claimed and therefore attempting to argue againist a strawman. I never claimed they appealed to the NT. I said Scripture. Not unless you want to deny the NT in it’s status as being inspired Scripture. The offical RCC position is that Scripture is a partial rule of faith. Why are you attacking Scripture on this point since it is at the very least a partial rule of faith for Roman Catholics ? Makes no sense at all.
Logical fallacy is being used. You demand me to prove a universal negative. The positive teaching for my position of that Scripture claims itself to be written by the inspiration of God . The burden of proof would lie with you on proving those other things are equally inspired by God. 2 Tim 3:16-18 is good enough for me to believe Scripture is inspired by God and thefore it’s nature and quality are special to it. We have no basis to expand inspiration to so called unwritten oral doctrinal traditions, councils and for forth without any basis.
Nice misrepresentation. We are fallible human beings as such we are imperfect. Schism is the result of sin. That is what Paul in 1 Cor 1:10-17 teaches. I view the entire professing church as guilty of this at time. If we followed your illogic we must reject christianity itself due to the many divisions within it. The big issue is you failed to take in to account of Romans 16:17-19. There can be at least according to that verse proper reason for separation when necessary and is not sinful. The Bible plus Tradition itself has resulted in divisions as well such as the separation between the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox and Old Catholics.
Same as above.
C
Chafer_DTS
Guest
I agree with you. I view my own doctrinal statement as a right reflection of Scripture. And Pastors are not supreme.
C
Chafer_DTS
Guest
N
Nicea325
Guest
On the contrary, it is your position which has a problem. It is considered a council and to ignore it does not aide your argument. So it has to be ecumenical to hold any credence?
Wrong! If Scripture was supreme and is supreme according to SS advocates,then would Paul and Barnabas even bother to take the matter to the Apostles? Why not just open up the Bible and settle it right there? I thought you said Scripture is supreme over all councils,bishops,traditions,etc? By the way, please tell me which Bible was considered supreme?
.
Sorry,but I do not accept your interpretation. Those verses do not state bishops are subjected to the supreme rule of Scripture. Those verses refer to rules for presbyters.
Simply because Paul uses scripture it automatically proves that Scripture is the sole rule? Again,show me where Christ taught Scripture is supreme? Remember…if SS is the mother of all doctrines,then evidently God has a lot to do with it.
Again, I do not accept your interpretation. The opening of chapter 4 deals with Jesus’ temptations,not advocating Scripture as supreme. Explain to me how written = SUPREME? Second, show me where Jesus teaches Scripture is absolutely supreme?
Sorry,but pure conjecture on your part and poor biblical exegesis. Show me where God’s Words are strictly binded to written words alone? Chapter and verse.
So in other words, ALL defined orthodox doctrines (Incarnation,Trinity,canon,etc) and dogma binded to ALL Christians was determined by a fallible church? Tell me…then with what certitude do we have these doctrines are truly accurate? So God allows His FALLIBLE church to make such grave matters a question of deep speculation? God sure likes to play with our salvation-eh?
C
Chafer_DTS
Guest
Thank you. My concern with him was in his attacking the nature and quality of Scripture in his arguments. The RCC like Protestants affirm that Scripture is the Word of God and yet he was asking me to to prove that Scripture is God’s Word. It seemed very odd that any professing believer would ever question on if Scripture is God’s Word in the manner of which he did to me. My basic disagreement with the RCC is that of so called sacred tradition as being equal with Scripture. I just merely reject unwritten oral doctrinal traditions which are contradicted or denied by Scripture. I affirm tradition so long as it is confirmed by Scripture.
N
Nicea325
Guest
So Paul was defending and supporting Sola Scriptura? Really?
So tell me…what other NT scriptures did Paul include to consider Scripture supreme in those verses? Show me where Paul teaches oral traditions have no weight or are less than Scripture? When did oral traditions cease and who said it? By the way, 2 Tim 3:16-18 has been debunked a million times and has been shown Paul was not writing those verses to advocate Scripture as supreme.
And facts are this…water is sufficient for man’s survival…but not water alone.
Pure conjecture and aman-made tradtion NO WHERE taught by Jesus or the 12. God is Supreme…not simply His written Words. BTW: Pleas show me one ecumenical council teaching: the nature and quality of Scripture makes it supreme?
.
First show me where the Bible teaches this? Second, where does God teach EVERYTHING must be said and taught in the Bible? Third, where does God teach everything not inspired, written or unwritten is to be considered secondary?
Wrong! How can written words binded in one volume on its own make such a declaration? The end result (Bible) cannot be greater than the Creator (Christ Church).
No one here is not saying such a thing. What we disagree is your false belief that Scripture is supreme because it is no where taught or said explicitly anywhere. Your interpretations are deeply questionable.
Historically inaccurate. If they had the OT during the first century,tell me when,where,and by WHOSE authority was the OT was canonized?
If you believe the NT books were all added and collected into one single collection after they were written by the first century it is you who has produced a strawman.
Exactly! So tell me WHICH Bible was supreme when Paul wrote and Jesus Himself taught Scripture was supreme,according to your argument? How many books? Which books? Which canon?
Again,the argument here is not on the validity of Scripture,but your position that Scripture is SUPREME. I have yet to read where Scripture explicitly teaches it is SUPREME.
Quote:
Chapter and verse Scriptures teaches are other things are fallible while Scripture is the only infallible source?
On the contrary, it is very logical. It is you alone who believes Scripture is supreme and in order to believe such a position Scripture must evidently teach: Scripture is Supreme on all matters of faith and teachings. The logical fallacy falls on you because you have yet to tell me **WHICH canonized Bible **was being used by Jesus,Apostles or Paul or the OT writers in defense of Sola Scriptura?
A universal negative? You mean something so vital for our salvation such as Sola Scriptura is a negative? Agan, if it is explicitly taught then show me where one verse where it reads along the lines: Scripture IS the final authority on all matters of faith and teaching.
.
Sorry,but it cannot claim anything unless by an external source. Then why bother to even convene council after council to develop the canon?
Wrong! The burden of proof lies all on you for believing a doctrine no where taught explicitly by God or by His Apostles. I want to read where the Bible explicitly teaches it is the SUPREME rule.
And nice denial.
Ilogical rebuttal. I thought Scripture is Supreme? If it is supreme thus it must be straight-forward,then why the need to found thousands of different denominations? I am sure scripture teaches demoninations are biblically sound-right?
And the big issue you failed with Roman 16:17-18 is that Paul is not advocating the founding of denominations based on disagreements. Sounds a like a mere cop-out to defend the endless divisions of Protestanism.
And that is a reason to defend the countless divisions of Protestanism? Does not matter who disagrees with any doctrine or dogma, the Truth still moves on. God is not concerned with our opinions. Disagreements or opinions have no bearing on doctrinal matters.
I would really like to read where Jesus explicitly teaches: The Bible is supreme.
C
Chafer_DTS
Guest
The council of Nicea historically speaking is listed as the first ecumentical council of the church held in order to contradict and refute Arianism. This is conceded by Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox and Protestantism.
Saying it is wrong does not make it so. Appeal was made specifically to Scripture confirm what they had discussed. James used Amos 9 as his evidence for the conclusion in the matter. They all discussed the matter specifically Peter and Paul to give insight to what was going on in their ministry. Scripture is supreme as I said. That was displayed there contextually and exegetically. Issues were discussed and opinions stated and then a conclusion based on Scripture which confirmed their views. The Law and the Prophets. was their Scripture as individual NT books were being written and added to the rule of faith as inspired Scripture. Scripture is Scripture in it’s nature and quality. You appear to try and set forth a contrast between the Old and New Testament when that is unnecessary to do.
They get their " doctrine " from Scripture right ? Are elders invent unknown doctrines that no one else knows about ? The word " doctrine " is stated in that verse right ? Didakalia is instruction or doctrine of which the people of God are to learn from Elders who teach them.The elders get this instruction or doctrine from Scripture. Paul used Scripture as proof for his view of elders of being suported in those verses. Thus Scripture is clearly seen as the rule of faith there being appealed to.
Strawman. I dont hold Scripture is the " sole rule " as you stated. It is the sole infallible rule of faith. I do see lesser rules of faith such as creeds and tradition and councils. Try and deal with what I believe and not resort to strawmen please.
Jesus used Scripture to combat the temptations and the lies of Satan. Jesus appealed to Scripture in this. Jesus by his exampled followed God’s Word in overcoming temptation from Satan. " It is written " shows His direct reply to Satan from Scripture itself. No appeal is made to a so called unwritten doctrinal oral tradition but to the Old Testament itself. Jesus taught Scripture as our rule of faith.
During that time they had both the oral word of God and the written word of God. Your question appears to create a strawman or misunderstanding of Sola Scriptura. What is claimed is now since the time of the apostles we have only God’s Word contained in written form that being inspired Scripture. We are not presently being given new divine revelation outside of Scripture. In other words, we have no prophets or apostles today. Basically God’s Word is strictly speaking found in His written word the Scriptures now.
They only confirmed what was already in Scripture. They did not invent new or unknown doctrines. The church is fallible otherwise you cant explain to me the heretical Arian Councils during the time of Nicea. We have the sure word in Scripture. Scripture is infallible.
God allowed fallible men to exist since Adam and Eve. The promise of salvation is based on the fact that God cannot lie. Since Scripture is God’s written word it by it’s nature has the authority of God of which there is no higher authority.
B
benjohnson
Guest
I’m enjoying the dialog between you two - it’s been charitable.
If I may interject: My poor logic goes like this:
- We need authority.
- Jesus taught with ultimate authority.
- The apostles taught with authority based on Jesus’s instruction.
- The early church then wrote down the words of God and the apostles at a time close to the resurrection.
- The later church was doing some obviously-not-good things, therefore the authority of the Church may no longer be safely assumed.
- Because the bible is the word of god written at a time closer to the resurrection by people with obvious authority, it holds higher authority than man’s current institutions that are in error.
- Therefore, let us use the word of god as written down by the early church as the final authority.
S
stewstew03
Guest
I don’t want to speak on behalf of pablope (and I admit I haven’t been reading every post), but I believe his point is: “How do you know that Scripture is God’s Word?” For example, how do you know the Second Epistle to Timothy is inspired by God?Thank you. My concern with him was in his attacking the nature and quality of Scripture in his arguments. The RCC like Protestants affirm that Scripture is the Word of God and yet he was asking me to to prove that Scripture is God’s Word. It seemed very odd that any professing believer would ever question on if Scripture is God’s Word in the manner of which he did to me. My basic disagreement with the RCC is that of so called sacred tradition as being equal with Scripture. I just merely reject unwritten oral doctrinal traditions which are contradicted or denied by Scripture. I affirm tradition so long as it is confirmed by Scripture.
- Status